Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 3rd Apr 2007 17:13 UTC, submitted by davidiwharper
Novell and Ximian "The Free Software Foundation has published a third draft of the GPL3 license. The FSF had indicated leading up to this draft that it would be addressing some concerns it had with the Novell-Microsoft agreements in the draft. Here's Novell's position on the new draft."
Thread beginning with comment 227031
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
SReilly
Member since:
2006-12-28

Microsoft, who has been quiet and even-headed throughout all this

I'm sorry to say this, but MS has been anything but quiet concerning this deal. In fact, Ballmer started beating his chest and crowing out that the deal was mostly about patent infringement from almost day one and in direct reply to Novell saying that it was not.

Novell convinces the largest OS company on the planet to help develop and market Linux

Market, yes. Develop, no. MS never signed up to help develop anything. In fact, the only thing MS had agreed to was to help Novell create better interoperability technology and to support Linux used in Virtualisation.

If worst comes to worst, Novell still owns their code. They could pull their code from the GPL

I'm afraid that it's to late. Although Novell could relicense they're code and release any future versions according to that new license, what they already have released will remain in the wild and I doubt that, once source code is released via the GPL, it would be possible to legally block any attempts at using that code even if you had changed your license. The only thing the community would lose is any changes that Novell would make in the future.

Anyway, Novell's code is miner compared to what they would lose if the GPLv3 prohibits them from distributing any GPLv3 code. We can do without them but they cannot continue to release a valid Linux distro without us.

Reply Parent Score: 5

trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

Far as I know GPL asserts that the author may change the license anytime she sees fit. If the license is changed to proprietary one everybody "in the wild" could be sued.

DG

Reply Parent Score: 3